Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Safe Alternative for Aortic Valve Replacement?

Abstract OBJECTIVES Minimally invasive extracorporeal circuits have been introduced to cardiac surgery in an attempt to reduce the negative effects of cardiopulmonary bypass on patient outcome. On the other hand, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) provides an excellent option to replace the aortic valve without the need for cardiopulmonary bypass. Several studies have compared TAVR to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) but none have utilized a minimally invasive extracorporeal circuit. METHODS We retrospectively analysed the results of both procedures among octogenarians operated in our department from 2003 to 2016. Excluded were patients with an active endocarditis, a history of previous cardiac surgery, as well as those who had a minimally invasive surgical approach. This yielded 81 and 142 octogenarians in the SAVR and TAVR groups, respectively. To compensate for a lack of randomization, we performed a propensity score analysis, which yielded 68 patient pairs for the final analysis. RESULTS The 30-day postoperative mortality was lower in the SAVR group (1.5% vs 5.9%) but not statistically significant (P = 0.4). In contrast, the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation was lower in the TAVR group (13% vs 29%) but also non-significant (P = 0.2). Finally, the incidence of paravalvular leakage was in favour of the SAVR group (2.9% vs 52%; P = 0.001) while the transfusion requirement was significantly lower in the TAVR group (29% vs 72%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS SAVR utilizing a minimally invasive extracorporeal circuit improves the quality of patient care and can offer an alternative to TAVR in octogenarians.

Download Full-text

Mini-Bentall: An Interesting Approach for Selected Patients

Innovations Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery ◽

10.1097/imi.0000000000000337 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

pp. 41-45 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Elisa Mikus ◽

Antonio Micari ◽

Simone Calvi ◽

Maria Salomone ◽

Marco Panzavolta ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Aortic Valve ◽

Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Valve Replacement ◽

Elective Surgery ◽

Skin Incision ◽

Ascending Aorta ◽

Minimally Invasive Approach ◽

Safe Alternative ◽

Invasive Approach

Objective Minimally invasive surgery through an upper hemisternotomy for aortic valve replacement has become the routine approach with excellent results. Actually, the same minimally invasive access is used for complex ascending aorta procedures only in few centers. We report our experience with minimally invasive approach for aortic valve and ascending aorta replacement using Bentall technique. Methods From January 2010 to November 2015, a total of 238 patients received ascending aorta and aortic valve replacement using Bentall De Bono procedure at our institution. Low- and intermediate-risk patients underwent elective surgery with a minimally invasive approach. The “J”-shaped partial upper sternotomy was performed through a 6-cm skin incision from the notch to the third right intercostal space. Patients who had previous cardiac surgery or affected by active endocarditis were excluded. The study included 53 patients, 44 male (83 %) with a median age of 63 years [interquartile range (IQR), 51–73 years]. A bicuspid aortic valve was diagnosed in 27 patients (51%). Results A biological Bentall using a pericardial Mitroflow or Crown bioprosthesis implanted in a Valsalva graft was performed in 49 patents. The remaining four patients were treated with a traditional mechanical conduit. Median cardiopulmonary bypass time and median cross-clamp time were respectively 84 (IQR, 75–103) minutes and 73 (IQR, 64–89) minutes. Hospital mortality was zero as well as 30-day mortality. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay were 1.9 and 8 days, respectively. The study population compared with patients treated with standard full sternotomy and similar preoperative characteristics showed similar results in terms of postoperative outcomes with a slightly superiority of minimally invasive group mainly regarding operative times, incidence of atrial fibrillation, and postoperative ventilation times. Conclusions A partial upper sternotomy is considered a safe option for aortic valve replacement. Our experience confirms that a minimally invasive approach using a partial upper J-shaped sternotomy can be a safe alternative approach to the standard in selected patients presenting with complex aortic root pathology.

Download Full-text